4.5 Article

Bone healing at implants with a fluoride-modified surface: an experimental study in dogs

期刊

CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
卷 18, 期 2, 页码 147-152

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01309.x

关键词

dental implants; histology; osseointegration; titanium

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The aim of the present experiment was to study early stages of osseointegration to implants with a fluoride-modified surface. Material and methods: Six mongrel dogs, about 1-year old, were used. All mandibular premolars and the first mandibular molars were extracted. Three months later, mucoperiosteal flaps were elevated in one side of the mandible and six sites were identified for implant placement. The control implants (MicroThread (TM)) had a TiOblast surface, while the test implants (OsseoSpeed (TM)) had a fluoride-modified TiOblast surface. Both types of implants had a similar geometry, a diameter of 3.5 mm and were 8 mm long. Following installation, cover screws were placed and the flaps were adjusted and sutured to cover all implants. Four weeks after the first implant surgery, the installation procedure was repeated in the opposite side of the mandible. Two weeks later, biopsies were obtained and prepared for histological analysis. The void that occurred between the cut bone wall of the recipient site and the macro-threads of the implant immediately following implant installation was used to study early bone formation. Results: It was demonstrated that the amount of new bone that formed in the voids within the first 2 weeks of healing was larger at fluoride-modified implants (test) than at TiOblast (control) implants. It was further observed that the amount of bone-to-implant contact that had been established after 2 weeks in the macro-threaded portion of the implant was significantly larger at the test implants than at the controls. Conclusion: It is suggested that the fluoride-modified implant surface promotes osseointegration in the early phase of healing following implant installation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据